Comment 1 by Christian Cornelssen, Oct 18, 2011
Encountered the same problem with a fresh mtn clone today (revision 22f47ba88188cc15e92de60cc2597df6054809a7). Workaround was to #include <boost/random.hpp> before the local headers in test/unit/tests/xdelta.cc. A clean approach should avoid the definition of such a macro (in src/sanity.hh) however.
- xdelta.diff - 711 bytes - view
Comment 2 by Christian Cornelssen, Oct 18, 2011
After having read HACKING, I have moved the BOOST #include after the #include of base.hh. Enjoy until you have worked out something solid regarding one-letter macros vs. C++ template parameters. With this patch, "make check" passes.
- xdelta.diff - 913 bytes - view
Comment 3 by Christian Cornelssen, Oct 18, 2011
Same patch, with corrected comment.
- xdelta.diff - 925 bytes - view
Comment 4 by Christian Cornelssen, Oct 19, 2011
"make distcheck" succeeds with the latest patch above (and with the patch of ticket 194).
Comment 5 by Christian Cornelssen, Oct 19, 2011
Note: According to HACKING, the first version of my patch should have caused "make distcheck" to fail. This did not happen. (I corrected the patch anyway.) With the patch of ticket 195, such violations are now found.
Comment 6 by Richard Levitte, Oct 25, 2011
Hmmmm, I wanted to verify this, but Debian [unstable] is still at boost 1.46... Perhaps someone else?
Comment 7 by Dan Horák, Oct 25, 2011
Successful build with test-suite passed on the development version of Fedora (aka Fedora Rawhide) with boost 1.47 is at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3459113 (will be cleaned up after 2 weeks)
Comment 8 by Richard Levitte, May 2, 2012
I'm currently at boost 1.49 (on Debian), and I haven't run into this problem, could it be that the issue has been solved with that version of boost? Anyhow, even though I can't see the issue in my environment, the patch seems harmless, so I've just applied it and am running a distcheck to see if anything comes up. If not, I'll commit.
Comment 9 by Richard Levitte, May 2, 2012
Status:
Started
Comment 10 by Richard Levitte, May 2, 2012
I just verified that the change doesn't cause any harm. Committed and pushed, revision ab1768da0fde81a823a77f7b92cb6bf6f1662b45
Status:
Verified
Comment 11 by Thomas Moschny, May 2, 2012
The L template parameter in Boost has been changed, see: https://svn.boost.org/trac/boost/changeset/76278 and http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2012/01/189247.php so, for newer Boost versions (1.49.0 and later, I guess), the patch should not be necessary anymore.
Sign in to reply to this comment.
Reported by Dan Horák, Sep 26, 2011